I am a bit confused. The requirement is that we need to create a REST API in Salesforce(Apex class) that has one POST method. Right now, I have been testing it with POSTMAN tool in 2 steps:
Making a POST request first with username, password, client_id, client_secret(that are coming from connected app in Salesforce), grant_type to receive access token.
Then I make another POST request in POSTMAN to create a lead in Salesforce, using the access token I received before and the body.
However, the REST API that I have in Salesforce would be called from various different web forms. So once someone fills out the webform, on the backend it would call this REST API in Salesforce and submits lead request.
I am wondering how would that happen since we can't use POSTMAN for that.
Thanks
These "various different web forms" would have to send requests to Salesforce just like Postman does. You'd need two POST calls (one for login, one to call the service you've created). It'll be bit out of your control, you provided the SF code and proven it works, now it's for these website developers to pick it up.
What's exactly your question? There are tons of libraries to connect to SF from Java, Python, .NET, PHP... Or they could hand-craft these HTTP messages, just Google for "PHP HTTP POST" or something...
https://developer.salesforce.com/index.php?title=Getting_Started_with_the_Force.com_Toolkit_for_PHP&oldid=51397
https://github.com/developerforce/Force.com-Toolkit-for-NET
https://pypi.org/project/simple-salesforce/ / https://pypi.org/project/salesforce-python/
Depending how much time they'll have they can:
cache the session id (so they don't call login every time), try to reuse it, call login again only if session id is blank / got "session expired or invalid" error back
try to batch it somehow (do they need to save these Leads to SF asap or in say hourly intervals is OK? How did YOU write the service, accepts 1 lead or list of records?
be smart about storing the credentials to SF (some secure way, not hardcoded). Ideally in a way that it's easy to use the integration against sandbox or production changing just 1 config file or environment variables or something like that
Related
So, I have a RESTful API (built with Hapi.js) that has endpoints consumed by users and my front-end app (built with Next.js). GET api/candies is one of them, I'll take it as an example.
The front-end asks the list of candies stored in my DB and displays them on a page anyone can access (it has to be this way). The front-end doesn't provide an API token since people could read/use it. But, users who want to get this list of candies (to build whatever they want with it) must provide a valid API token (which they get by creating an account on my front-end app).
How could my API tell if a request for api/candies is from a user or from my front-end app, so it can verify (or not) the validity of their token?
I'm wondering if my problem isn't also about web scraping.
Can anyone help me please? :D
I thought about the same problem a while ago. If your frontend has a client side REST client (JS+XHR/fetch), then I don't think it is possible to do this reliably, because no matter how you identify your frontend REST client, your users will be able to copy it just by checking the HTTP requests in browser via CTRL+SHIFT+I. There are even automation tools, which use the browser e.g. Selenium. If you have a server side REST client (e.g. PHP+CURL), then just create a consumer id for the frontend and use a token. Even in this case I can easily write a few lines of code that uses the frontend for the same request. So if you want to sell the same service for money that you provide for free on your frontend, then you are out of luck here. This does not mean that there won't be consumers who are willing to pay for it.
I think your problem is bad business model.
Your requirement can be addressed by inspecting different headers sent by different user agents. You can also add custom headers from your front-end and validate the same on the backend.
I am developing a web application with Spring Boot and a React.js SPA, but my question is not specific to those libraries/frameworks, as i assume reporting client-side JS errors to the server (for logging and analyzing) must be a common operation for many modern web applications.
So, suppose we have a JS client application that catches an error and a REST endpoint /errors that takes a JSON object holding the relevant information about what happened. The client app sends the data to the server, it gets stored in a database (or whatever) and everyone's happy, right?
Now I am not, really. Because now I have an open (as in allowing unauthenticated create/write operations) API endpoint everyone with just a little knowledge could easily spam.
I might validate the structure of JSON data the endpoint accepts, but that doesn't really solve the problem.
In questions like "Open REST API attached to a database- what stops a bad actor spamming my db?" or "Secure Rest-Service before user authentification", there are suggestions such as:
access quotas (but I don't want to save IPs or anything to identify clients)
Captchas (useless for error reporting, obviously)
e-mail verification (same, just imagine that)
So my questions are:
Is there an elegant, commonly used strategy to secure such an endpoint?
Would a lightweight solution like validating the structure of the data be enough in practice?
Is all this even necessary? After all I won't advertise my error handling API endpoint with a banner in the app...
I’ve seen it done three different ways…
Assuming you are using OAuth 2 to secure your API. Stand up two
error endpoints.
For a logged in user, if an errors occurs you would
hit the /error endpoint, and would authenticate using the existing
user auth token.
For a visitor, you can expose a /clientError (or
named in a way that makes sense to you) endpoint that takes the
client_credentials token for the client app.
Secure the /error endpoint using an api key that would be scope for
access to the error endpoint only.
This key would be specific to the
client and would be pass in the header.
Use a 3rd party tool such as Raygun.io, or any APM tool, such as New Relic.
Actually I have an API called update user data, it is called when the user moves from one page to another page. If the user copy the API from console and post in postman, user should not able to update the user data. How to provide security or implement feature to not to update data through post man.
You really can't.
You can slightly make it harder using some CSRF protection, but that's just it - it will only make it a bit harder, but not stop anyone determined.
If your API is public, you should be ready for your users to have custom client apps.
I am a bit confused by your question. Because PostMan or other applications like Fiddler are created to make the job easier for developers during development. anyhow if you are concern about who makes call to your webpage, you can make your API private and just give access to the user that have the right credentials. You can also read about CSRF or XSS.
I'm currently trying to setup FOSOAuthServerBundle with my Symfony2 app.
Everything seems to be setup and functional, anyway I'm stuck after the installation.
What is the proper workflow with URLs to get the access_token ?
I tried /oauth/v2/auth, but sounds like I need to define a Client object first.
How to create/generate Client ? Clients are always supposed to be created manually ?
FOSOAuthServerBundle doc is great, but seems to skip all the usage workflow. Am I supposed to check the OAuth2 doc for this ?
Thanks !
In short, yes. You should be using the oAuth2 RFC to determine which workflow you want to use. In regards to client registration the RFC specifically states that the means through which a client registers is beyond the scope of the specification (https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6749#section-2).
With that being said I can give you some insight into how I did this. My application is a mobile phone application that connects to several services running on various servers. I'm also using the Resource Owner Password Credentials Grant.
The way I approached this was: when the application loads, the first thing it does is to check if it has an oAuth2 client id. If it doesn't, then it POSTS to a create client endpoint I've setted up with the meta-data I need. The endpoint validates the POST, creates the client and returns the client information. The application stores the client id and the process doesn't have to be repeated the next time.
Application loads;
Application checks for oAuth2 client id;
If there is one, the process ends;
If there isn't, it posts to http://www.example.com/client;
If we get a 200, store the oAuth2 client id.
I could have also created the oAuth2 client when the user created an account in the application, but I wanted to make the registration process as fast as possible. Creating the client would have added some extra waiting time to the process.
Check this: http://blog.logicexception.com/2012/04/securing-syfmony2-rest-service-wiith.html
It's quite simple to convert to Doctrine, whether you use it.
There's a command-line that does exactly what you need: create a Client!
I have a Facebook canvas app. I am using the JS SDK to authenticate the user on the browser-side and request various information via FB.api (e.g. name, friends, etc.).
I also want to persist some additional user information (not held on Facebook) to the database on my server by making an ajax call:
{ userFavouriteColour: "Red" }
To save this on the server and associate with the correct user, I need to know the Facebook uid and this presents a problem. How do I pass the uid from the client to the server.
Option 1: Add uid to the ajax request:
{ uid: "1234567890",
userFavouriteColour: "Red" }
This is obviously no good. It would be trivial for anyone to make an ajax request to my web service using someone else's Facebook Id and change their favourite colour.
Option 2: On the server, extract the uid from a cookie:
Is this even possible? I have read that Facebook sets a cookie containing the uid and access token but do I have access to this cookie on my domain? More importantly, can I securely extract the uid form the cookie or is this open to spoofing just like option 1.
Option 3: User server-side authentication on the server:
I could use the server-side authentication to validate the user identity on my server. But will this work if I am already using client-side authentication on the browser? Will I end up with two different access tokens? I would like to make FB.api requests from the browser so I need the access token on the client (not just on the server).
This must be a very common scenario so I think I'm missing something fundamental. I have read a lot of the Facebook documentation (various authentication flows, access tokens, signed_request, etc.) and many posts on SO, but I still don't understand how client-side authentication and server-side authentication play nicely together.
In short, I want to know the user's identity on the server but still make requests to the Facebook api from the client browser?
(I am using ASP.NET and the Facebook C# SDK on the server)
EDIT: Added bounty. I was hoping to get a more deifnitive, official recommendation on how to handle this situation, or even an example. As said, I have already read a lot of the official FB docs on authentication flows but I still can't find anything definitive on how client-side and server-side authentication work together.
Option 1:
The easiest way I can think of is to include the accessToken in JS and pass it with the ajax call.
Option 2:
Using the same as option 1, but instead of sending just the accessToken, send the signedRequest.
On the server side you can decode it using (TryParseSignedRequest method) which will give you the UserID :-)
Note: signedRequest is encrypted with the application Secret. you are the only one who should know it, so you are safe on that end.
Disclaimer:
I have no coding experience in C#, but a little search in google gave me this:
Facebook C# SDK for ASP.NET
Making AJAX Requests with the Facebook C# SDK
It's very simple actually.
When the user loads you app use the server side authentication, get the access token and load the user data by issuing an api request from the server.
On the server side you'll have everything you need and it's sandboxed.
When the page renders for the user, using the js sdk get the user authentication data, you should be able to use FB.getLoginStatus since the user already went through the server side authentication.
Now on the client side you also have an access token which you can use to get the user data from the graph api.
The two tokens will be different, and will also have different expiration, but that should not be a problem, both token should work properly as you'd expect them to.
Since both sides have their own token and a way to make requests to the api, there's no need to send any fb data between them.
So the 3rd option you mentioned, to me, sounds the best, and it's really simple to implement that too.
Edit
All facebook SDKs are just wrappers for http request since the entire fb api is made on http requests.
The SDKs just give you easy and shorter access to the data with out the need to build the url yourself (with all the different possible parameters), make the request and parse the response.
To be completely honest, I think that stop providing a way for the C# SDK to support server side authentication is a very bad decision.
What's the point in providing a SDK which does not implement the entire api?
The best answer to your question, from my experience, is to use both server and client side authentication, and since the C# SDK does not support it, my advice to you is to create your own SDK.
It's not complicated at all, I already implemented it for python and java (twice), and since you'll be developing it for your own needs it can be tailored for your exact needs, unlike a public SDK which should support all possible options.
2nd Edit
There's no need to create a completely new SDK, you can just "extend" the ones you're using and add the missing parts that you need, like sever side authentication support.
I don't know if it's language specific but using both server-side and client-side authentication does no harm.
You can work on option 2 but yes, that will be also vulnerable to spoofing.
Doing option 3, you will be having a single access token for that user session, so that would be the best choice according to me since you always have chance of spoofing when passing user information from client side.
I had exactly the same question recently. It's option 2. Check this post from the Facebook blog.
To be honest I am not enough of a hacker to know if you could spoof the UID in the cookie, but this seems to be the 'official' way to do it.
EDIT: to the other question under option 2, yes, I believe you have to access this cookie on your domain.